Author
Topic: British Orthodox Church (Read 1909 times)

How comes the British Orthodox church isn't joined with the other main Orthodox churches?? I know a small bit about the council that the coptic didn't turn up to and so they are outside but what does that mean in practise??

They agree with each other but don't join in together with things??They don't agree about hardly anything??

Will that be changed by any future meetings that can solve the problem?? or is there a big stumble block that neither can get over??Thanks Poppy

ps if there's a thread about this then link it and i will go read save everyone having to repost what they said somewhere else.

Quis custodiet ipsos custodes? Who can watch the watchmen?"No one is paying attention to your post reports"Why do posters that claim to have me blocked keep sending me pms and responding to my posts? That makes no sense.

How comes the British Orthodox church isn't joined with the other main Orthodox churches?? I know a small bit about the council that the coptic didn't turn up to and so they are outside but what does that mean in practise??

They agree with each other but don't join in together with things??They don't agree about hardly anything??

Will that be changed by any future meetings that can solve the problem?? or is there a big stumble block that neither can get over??Thanks Poppy

ps if there's a thread about this then link it and i will go read save everyone having to repost what they said somewhere else.

The British Orthodox are Oriental Orthodox (Non-Chalcedonian) as opposed to the Greeks, Russians, Serbs, etc. who are Eastern Orthodox (Chalcedon.) In a nutshell, the difference is that the Oriental Orthodox recognize three councils as Ecumenical, whereas the Eastern Orthodox have more. This all has to do with a disagreement about how to define the divinity and humanity of Christ (One Incarnate Nature vs. Two Natures, etc.)

It is of course much more complicated than that, and it has been the subject of much discussion, as well as heated arguments, on this board. The nastier arguments here get thrown into a private forum.

There is a short, non-polemical thread that recently addressed the linguistic differences between us:

There are many scholars who have studied the issues and have come to the conclusion that we believe the same thing, despite our different language. Some others of course disagree with this. I don't know if unity between us will come any time soon, as there are a lot of other issues to clear up between us, such as what to do with saints who are venerated by one Church while being condemned by the other, etc. It's something we can pray for, though.

The rejection came later. A reading of the acts of that council shows it concluded, sort of - with the question being left open for them.

I maintain (perhaps naively so) that the council can be considered STILL open and therein the path to reunion.

Well, the OO Tradition is really founded on a group of Saints who had a consensus rejection of Chalcedon, even if that occurred after Chalcedon, so there really is no accepting Chalcedon without repudiating the history teaching on it. In that sense the status of Chalcedon is not open in OOy.

I am not certain Saint Dioscoros was even there. I wasn't necessarily referring to the OOs in my Open contention but won't argue your point. Neither will I further get into this on the sub-board and topic.

Logged

"Religion is a neurobiological illness and Orthodoxy is its cure." - Fr. John S. Romanides